Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] A reformulation of the question

Expand Messages
  • eupraxis@aol.com
    Yes, but that is not what I was asking. I am not positing any kind of relativism, nor assuming it. You also keep bringing up countries and organizations, which
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 6, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, but that is not what I was asking. I am not positing any kind of relativism, nor assuming it. You also keep bringing up countries and organizations, which is quite outside the subject here. I am speaking about Dasein, about the Existential subject, the actual person, AN actual person, alone, subjective.

      Wil







      -----Original Message-----
      From: tom <tsmith17_midsouth1@...>
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 1:32 pm
      Subject: Re: [existlist] A reformulation of the question

























      Wil,



      Maybe turning over in his grave is a just reward for his alliance with the Nazis. My point was that allegiances to a nation, a tribe, or a cause will be often seen as criminal from a position outside of the nation, tribe, or cause, and heroic and idealistic from within it. This is true whither we are discussing Nazism, Islamic terrorists, or the IRA in Ireland etc.

      Tom

      ----- Original Message -----

      From: eupraxis@...

      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

      Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:45 PM

      Subject: Re: [existlist] A reformulation of the question



      Tom: "My point was that historically Heidegger's Dasein was fairly mainstream, as opposed to extreme criminality or madness; although from a more humanistic perspective, history itself can be seen as an extreme case of criminality or madness."



      Tom,



      I think Heidegger is turning in his grave from th
      e "mainstream" remark. If you are correct, you have single-handedly overturned the Heideggerian notion of authenticity in one fell swoop. While I applaud the effort, I would have to come to Heidegger's defense on this score. Heidegger's notion of authenticity is the very antithesis of 'mainstream', which he dismisses as indicative of "das Mann", the 'they' of 'you know what they say'.



      The second point puts the whole question under a cloud, revisiting what Hegel derisively called "the night in which all cows are black"; or in order words it ducks the question. Of course, that is your right.



      Wil



      -----Original Message-----



      From: tom <tsmith17_midsouth1@...>



      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com



      Sent: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:18 am



      Subject: Re: [existlist] A reformulation of the question



      Wil,



      You wrote



      I am not sure if this question is not interesting to anyone here or if



      everyone is too busy to indulge in matters that are too theoretical, but I have to



      ask again whether there can be a Dasein whose "authenticity", and in something



      like

      Heidegger's sense, is the result of an extreme sense of criminality, or



      is the result of an extreme affirmation of one's own 'madness'.



      My point was that historically Heidegger's Dasein was fairly mainstream, as opposed to extreme criminality or madness; although from a more humanistic perspective, history itself can be seen as an extreme case of criminality or madness.



      Tom




      ----- Original Message -----



      From: eupraxis@...



      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com



      Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 10:50 AM



      Subject: Re: [existlist] A reformulation of the question



      Tom,



      I don't see this as having anything to do with the subject. I am asking a question that has specific Existential (and Phenomenological) import and reference. I am not sure what you post is answering.



      Wil



      -----Original Message-----



      From: tom <tsmith17_midsouth1@...>



      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com



      Sent: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 10:43 am



      Subject: Re: [existlist] A reformulation of the question



      Wil.



      I assume that Heidegger saw his Nazism as an expression of his love and support for Germany. This dovetails to an extent with this response from Mary on 1-1.



      The hunter-gatherer dynamic is more complex and depends on diversity. I guess we can



      agree there is nothing wrong with predation. It simply exists. It seems the difference



      between natural law and human law is that natural=2

      0law includes the earth and the cosmos,



      whereas human law is considered with a smaller more lethal game, eliminating



      competitors. No competitors, no game, if you will pardon the pun.



      Mary



      As Mary says,"predation exists". I guess a person's loyalties and priorities determine what they see as good or evil. The good of the tribe was the original loyalty and value. Of course, visionaries both of the religious and s
      ecular varieties have been advocating expansion of our love beyond the tribe to all humanity; and animal rights advocates would like to see such love expand beyond humanity. Certainly20the Treaty of Versailles created an extreme hardship for Germans,and the resentment of the conditions imposed by that treaty obviously was a catalyst that led many to embrace Nazism as a rebirth of hope and pride.The Indian classic, the Bhagavad-Gita depicts the conflict between the values of being a warrior for your tribe on the one hand, and non violence on the other. I read a quote by John Lennon where he said "Good guys, bad guys, its really all a battle inside our mind between Christ and Hitler, lets hope Christ wins." Norman Mailer said the two most interesting characters to him in history were Christ and Hitler.



      UNIVERSAL SOLDIER



      Buffy Sainte-Marie



      © Caleb Music-ASCAP



      I wrote "Universal Soldier" in the basement of The Purple Onion coffee house in Toronto in the early sixties. It's about individual responsibility for war an

      d how the old feudal thinking kills us all. Donovan had a hit with it in 1965.



      He's five feet two and he's six feet four



      He fights with missiles and with spears



      He's all of 31 and he's only 17



      He's been a soldier for a thousand years



      He's a Catholic, a Hindu, an atheist, a Jain,



      a Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew



      and he knows he shouldn't kill



      and he knows he always will



      kill you for
      me my friend and me for you



      =0



      AAnd he's fighting for Canada,



      he's fighting for France,



      he's fighting for the USA,



      and he's fighting for the Russians



      and he's fighting for Japan,



      and he thinks we'll put an end to war this way



      And he's fighting for Democracy



      and fighting for the Reds



      He says it's for the peace of all



      He's the one who must decide



      who's to live and who's to die



      and he never sees the writing on the walls



      But without him how would Hitler have



      condemned him at Dachau



      Without him Caesar would have stood alone



      He's the one who gives his body



      as a weapon to a war



      and without him all this killing can't go on



      He's the universal soldier and he



      really is to blame



      His orders come from far away no more



      They come from him, and you, and me



      and brothers can't you see



      this is not the way we put an end to war.



      Tom



      ----- Original Message -----



      From: eupraxis@...



      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com



      Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 8:30 AM



      =0



      A Subject: [existlist] A reformulation of the question



      I am not sure if this question is not interesting to anyone here or if



      everyone is too busy to indulge in matters that are too theoretical, but I have to



      ask again whether there can be a Dasein whose "authenticity", and
      in something



      like Heidegger's sense, is the result of an extreme sense of criminality, or



      is the result of an extreme affirmation of one's own 'madness'.



      Let's remember that 'authenticity" in Heidegger is "eigenlich", whose root is



      eigen, or 'ownmost'. We, all of us here, have automatically assumed that the



      "existentialia', or categories of experience that disclose the world (in B&T)



      have as an axiomatic and absolute axiological presupposition that truth and



      morality are coeval and mutual. But Heidegger never makes that case; he never



      even brings it up. Few philosophers have, the presupposition being part of the



      general ontology itself.



      But, to ask it again, cannot a notion, by virtue of its extreme renegade



      status alone=2

      0amount to an authentic mode of being, even if that authenticity



      derives from an idea that cannot or may not be supported, ultimately, by the usual



      'discourse of truth'?



      Can we not also expand this quasi-Manichean question into a more general



      'agonistic' one where philosophical discourse appears all of a sudden not as a



      discourse of truth, but a field of w



      hat Nietzsche would call 'the will to power'?



      And in this light, what are the potentialities for an agonistic political



      philosophy, an aesthetics of transgression, rebellion and counter-truth, etc.?



      If this question is permitted, does not the radical question of philosoph
      y



      amount to this antagonism of authenticities which will circumscribe a



      meta-ethics, a meta-politics that can redefine the parameters of left and right, or even



      render them as superfluous? Or not?



      I ask this, as it were, on a vacation from what Bill call's my Hegelianism.



      Wil



      **************



      Stay up-to-date on the latest news - from fashion trends to



      celebrity break-ups and everything in between.



      (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000024)



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      [Non-text portions of this message have bee

      n removed]



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






















      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.